While I don’t mind if they’re related, the evidence is rather thin. Interestingly, chariots and royal burials were also found in Sinauli, India which provide an interesting alternative to this theory.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/radiocarbon/article/...

Do you believe in out-of-india theory for IE or are you just sceptical about the use of the Rig Veda specifically.

It gets a bit silly when you start using archaeology to prop up modern political doctrines. Humans left Africa over 100k years ago, and groups have been moving around ever since. Whether a group moved from the Caucasus to South Asia or vice versa, around 5k years ago, shouldn't really matter. Perhaps they had moved in the opposite direction 10k years ago. Obviously, we all have human ancestors who were living 5k, 10k, 100k, 200k years ago.

> Whether a group moved from the Caucasus to South Asia or vice versa, around 5k years ago, shouldn't really matter.

It's not that it "matters" in a political or nationalistic sense. That's an error in interpretation of the motivation for this kind of work.

It is important because the more we know about how we got where we are, the better.

Science is useful, if it is not immediately obvious, then future generations will surely find an use for it, as it has happened time after time with mathematical ideas.

I would even say it is you who are putting a modern political spin on this by rejecting it.

The research is fine. I'm referring to the likes of Hindutva trying to establish that the Aryans were "indigenous" to India and subsequently migrated elsewhere, thus proving that Hindus alone are indigenous to India. The out-of-india theory referred to above.

Hindutva says Islamists and white Europeans were invders. Hows that wrong?

It's correct, but so what? It's part of history, nobody alive was involved, and it shouldn't have political implications for how we want to live today.

Ah, I see. I agree with you then.

Exactly. Humans are moving constantly, even today. It is silly to attach political doctrines to such complex events.

For all we know, we might never get a complete picture and there might be many other aspects which we are not aware of behind PIE.

Option#2: I was only curious about the GPs claim which added Rigveda to the mix.

Its heavily contested if these were chariots. If anything, I would suggest that the consensus scholarly opinion is that these were ox drawn carts, not chariots.

- no horse remains or equestrian objects have been found, anywhere in India for this time period

- solid wooden wheels (shown in the reconstruction) are too heavy for horses to draw, for which spoked wheels were developed in the Steppe

- the shape of the yoke that would be tied to the animals is straight, the way ox carts have, like Harrapan ox carts. By contrast, yokes for horses are curved, to match the animal's posture.